Quesnel v. Prudential Insurance, 1st Cir. (1995)

7/26/2019 Quesnel v. Prudential Insurance, 1st Cir. (1995)

1/24

USCA1 Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 95-1178

THOMAS QUESNEL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellee.

____________________


2/24

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Michael Ponsor, U.S. District Judge]

___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge,

___________

Lynch, Circuit Judge,

_____________

and Casellas,* District Judge.

______________

_____________________

John F. Moriarty, Jr., with whom Moriarty & Neves was

______________________ _________________

brief for appellant.

Burton J. Fishman, with whom Tucker, Flyer & Lewis and

_________________ _____________________

Patrick Reilly were on brief for appellee.

______________


3/24

____________________

September 25, 1995

____________________

____________________

* Of the District of Puerto Rico, sitting by designation.

TORRUELLA, Chief Judge. Plaintiff-appellant T

TORRUELLA, Chief Judge

_____________


4/24

Quesnel challenges the district court's dismissal of his wron

termination action, originally brought in state court, aga

his former employer, Prudential Insurance Company ("Prudentia

The district court found that Quesnel's claim necessit

analysis of the collective bargaining agreement binding

parties, and accordingly held the claim to be preempte

federal labor law. For the following reasons, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

BACKGROUND

Quesnel began his employment at Prudential a

district agent, and became a sales manager in 1991. He l

returned to the level of district agent in September of

year.

Throughout Quesnel's period of employment, Pruden


5/24


6/24

agents were employed and compensated. The CBA also set fo

inter alia, grievance procedures, which provided for

_____ ____

arbitration of grievances for wrongful termination. Quesnel

Prudential were also parties to a standard Agent's Agree

which set forth the scope of the agency relationship.

Quesnel was terminated in March 1992. He filed

action in Massachusetts state court in May 1994, claiming


7/24

Prudential had terminated him for the purpose of denying hi

earned commissions, which, under Massachusetts law, is consi

a wrongful termination. See Fortune National Cash Register

___ _______________________________

373 Mass. 96, 104-05 (1977). Prudential removed the case to

United States District Court for the District of Massachuse

and moved to dismiss Quesnel's claim on the grounds that it

preempted by federal labor law and that Quesnel had faile

exhaust his administrative remedies available to him under

terms of the CBA. Quesnel responded that he was not a membe

the Union and therefore not a party to the CBA. Instead,

argued, his employment relationship with Prudential

controlled by the Agent's Agreement, which, he asserted,

independent of the CBA, and thus his claims were not preemp


8/24

Accordingly, Quesnel moved for remand to state court.

On February 1, 1995, the district court gra

Prudential's motion to dismiss and denied Quesnel's request

remand. The district court ruled that because "no court c

begin to address [Quesnel's] claims here without immersing it

in the CBA," Quesnel's state law claims were preempted u

-3-


9/24

principles of federal labor law. The court then dismi

Quesnel's claim because it was governed by the NLRA and bec

Quesnel was time barred from any recovery.2

DISCUSSION

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review A. Standard of Review

__________________

Appellate review of a district court's dismissal u

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) is plenary. We therefore apply the

standard as did the district court, that "'a complaint shoul

be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it app

beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of fact

support of his claim which would entitle him to relie

Miranda v. Ponce Fed'l Bank, 948 F.2d 41, 44 (1st Cir. 1

_______ _________________

(quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)).


10/24

______ ______

B. Preemption of Quesnel's Claim

B. Preemption of Quesnel's Claim

_____________________________

The sole issue before us is whether Quesnel's state

claims are preempted as a matter of law under 301(a) of

Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. 185(a).3 It

____________________

2 The CBA sets forth grievance and arbitration procedures

wrongful termination. Quesnel did not pursue these remedies,

the time limit for seeking relief under the CBA has lap

Finding that Quesnel was subject to the CBA, the district c

accordingly dismissed his claims for failure to exhaust t

administrative remedies.

3 Section 301(a) provides:

Suits for violation of contracts between

an employer and a labor organization

representing employees in an industry

affecting commerce as defined in this

chapter, or between any such labor

organizations, may be brought in any


11/24

district court of the United States

having jurisdiction of the parties,

-4-

well-established that 301 completely preempts a state law c

if the resolution of the claim necessitates analysis of,

substantially depends on the meaning of, a collective bargai

agreement. Lingle v. Norge Division of Magic Chef, Inc.,

______ ____________________________________

U.S. 399, 405-06 (1988); Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck, 471

____________________ _____


12/24

202, 220 (1985); Magerer v. John Sexton & Co., 912 F.2d 525,

_______ __________________

(1st Cir. 1990).

1. Does Quesnel's claim require interpretation of

1. Does Quesnel's claim require interpretation of

_____________________________________________

CBA?

CBA?

____

Assuming Quesnel is subject to the CBA, we

determine whether resolution of his claims in the instant

necessitates analysis of, or substantially depends upon

meaning of, the CBA. If so, then his claims must be dismisse

preempted in light of the foregoing principles. Having caref

examined the CBA, we think that the district court corre

found that the CBA is directly implicated in any resolutio

Quesnel's claims. The CBA sets forth the terms and scope of


13/24

employment relationship of all district agents, encompas

rates of pay, wages, and conditions of employ

Significantly, the CBA sets forth grievance procedures

alleged wrongful termination. Determination of whether Que

was indeed wrongfully terminated, and whether his failure

follow grievance procedures set forth in the CBA nonethe

precludes his claim would require a court, as the district c

____________________

without respect to the amount in

controversy or without respect to the

citizenship of the parties.

-5-


14/24

found, to immerse itself in the CBA's terms. Interpretatio

the CBA is therefore crucial to any resolution of Quesn

claim.


15/24


16/24

-6-

2. Is Quesnel subject to the CBA?

2. Is Quesnel subject to the CBA?

______________________________

Because we find that resolution of Quesnel's cl

require interpretation of the CBA, his claims are preempte


17/24

Quesnel is indeed subject to the CBA's terms. Quesnel wi

does not dispute this; rather, he claims that his employ

relationship with Prudential was governed not by the CBA,

solely by the Agent's Agreement, and therefore his claims s

be adjudicated in state court. At the very least, Que

argues, there exists a genuine issue of material fact a

whether he is subject to the CBA.4

Whether Quesnel is subject to the CBA is in this c

however, a question of law, not of fact. See Coll v.

___ ____

Diagnostics Systems, Inc., 50 F.3d 1115, 1122 (1st Cir. 1

__________________________

(interpretation of contract is a question of law); Whitney B

________

v. Sprafkin, 3 F.3d 530, 534 (1st Cir. 1993) (same).

________

examining the CBA and the Agent's Agreement, we conclude tha


18/24

is clear that Quesnel is indeed subject to the CBA's te

First, the CBA was effective on the date Quesnel beca

district agent, and by its terms encompasses "all District A

employed or hereafter to be employed" by Prudential, inclu

those agents employed in the company's Massachusetts offices.

____________________

4 Quesnel contends that because the district court went be

the pleadings by considering the CBA, the Agent's Agreement,

an affidavit of Quesnel, it was actually treating Prudenti

motion to dismiss as one for summary judgment, and that we

therefore apply the standard of review applicable to su

judgment decisions. As we explain, however, because we conc

as a matter of law that Quesnel's claim is preempted,

arguments regarding the appropriate standard of review

irrelevant.

-7-


19/24

Second, regardless of the fact that Quesnel was n

Union member, he is a member of the bargaining unit for

benefit the CBA was created. The Union was and is obli

under 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C

159(a), to represent the interests of all employees in collec

___

bargaining, including nonmembers. See Vaca v. Sipes, 386

___ ____ _____

171 (1967) (unions must fairly represent all employees in a

for which it is exclusive bargaining representative). Theref


20/24

the fact that Quesnel is not a Union member does not remove

from the bargaining unit for whose benefit the CBA was crea

See Saunders v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 927 F.2d 1154, 1156 ( ___ ________ ___________________

Cir. 1991) (individual employee is bound by terms of collec

bargaining agreement even if not a union member). Indeed, in

brief Quesnel essentially concedes that he was a member of

bargaining unit of the CBA, and maintains that he could

_____

invoked the CBA's grievance and arbitration procedures,

properly chose not to. Quesnel cannot pick and choose amon

avenues of remedy, however; having been a member of

bargaining unit and received the benefits of the CBA

employed, Quesnel cannot now disclaim it. The grie

procedures set forth in the CBA is exclusive of other dis


21/24

resolution mechanisms.

Finally, we do not think that the Agent's Agree

displaces or in any way substitutes for the CBA. The Age

Agreement does not deal with terms and conditions of employ

or with grievance procedures, as does the CBA. Rather,

-8-

Agent's Agreement merely delineates Prudential's busi


22/24

policies applicable to district agents. Moreover, Articles

and XXVII of the CBA specifically reference and amend the Age

Agreement, a strong indication that the Agent's Agreement is

intended to supplant, but merely to supplement, the CBA.

therefore find that Quesnel is subject to the terms of the

and that his claims are, accordingly, preempted.

CONCLUSION

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm.

______


23/24

-9-


24/24

Documents

Quesnel v. Prudential Insurance, 1st Cir. (1995)